Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1887-08-30

Compelled to Disclose to Congressional
Investigators-Leland Stanford Beats the
Pacific Railway Commission in the
Courts-The Justices Opinion.
SAN Francisco, Aug. 80 Justice Field
on Monday delivered the opinion of the
United States court in the Leland Stanford
matter. The court decides that the Pacific
railway commission is not judicial body.
1t possesses no Judicial power 1t can deter
mine no right of the government or of the
companies Investigated by it Its report to
the president viii not even be admissible in a
judicial inquiry as evidence of any matters
investigated. 1t is a mere board OF inquiry
to obtain information on certain matters and
report the result to the president and to con-
gress Ii is authorized to invoke the aid of
the United States courts in requiring the at
tendance and testimony of witnesses, the
production of books, papers and documents;
and such courts may, in case of refusal OF
witness to obey the subpoena, issue an order
requiring such witness to obey and to pro-
duce books and papers and answer questions.
The citizens right of personal security IN
wolves not only the protection of his person
from assault, but the exemption of his prl-
vate affairs, books and papers from the scru-
tiny Of others The law compels the pro-
duction in judicial proceedings of such docu-
mens as affect the interests of Others, or
which are necessary to the prosecution of
criminals, and in only one of these ways can
they he obtained and made public againstthe
will of the ownars In Boyd VS. the United
States dl6 u : 6lll the supreme court said:
Any compulsory discovery by extorting the
party's oath or compelling the production of
his private books and papers to convict him
of crimes or TO forfeit his property, is con-
contrary TO the principles of free govern
ment"
This had reference to criminal proceedings
but is applicable to any such production of
private books and papers of party other
wise than in the course of judicial proceed
ings or direct suit for that purpose. 1t is a
forcible intrusion into and compulsory ex-
assure of ones private affairs and papers
without Judicial process or in the course of
judicial proceedings, which is contrary TO the
principles of free government and abhorrent
to the instincts of Englishmen and Americans
In Hallett kilbourne VS. Thompson us U.
S. 1853 Thompson had refused to obey an or
der OF the house of representatives to produce
books and papers, and was by order of the
speaker confined in Jail forty-fve days When
he was released on habeas corpus by the
supreme court of the District of Columbia, be
sued the sergeant-at arms, and the supreme
| court of the United States held that congress
| does not possess the power to inquire into the
| private affairs of private citizens.
The act creating this commission authorizes
| them to inquire whether any of the directors,
| officers or employees of the Central Pacific
are interested in other business corporations
with which undertakings or leases have been
entered into, but according TO principles de-
cIared in the Thompson and Boyd cases they
are limited in their inquiries as to the inter
| est of such officers in other business, to such
matters as these persons may choose to dis
close They can not be compelled to open
| their books and expose such other business to
the inspection of the commission. They
were not prohibited from engaging in other
lawful business because of their interest in
and connection with the Central Pacific; and
that other business might as well be the con-
struction and management of other railroads
as the planting of vines or raising Of fruit, in
which some of them have in fact been en-
gagged; and they are entitled to the same ex-
emption from inquisitoral Investigation into
such business as any other citizens engaged
i'll like business
With reference to vouchers, respecting
which the principal interrogatories are pro
pounded to which We are asked to compel
answers from witnesses, it Is conceded by the
commission in this motion that the money
covered by them were not charged against
the United States in ascertaining the net
earnings of the company. If such were the
ease it is difficult to see what interest the
United States can have in the disposition of
these moneys The courts can not, upon that
concession, aid the commission in ascertain
ing how moneys were expended. The com.
mission NAV invoke the aid of the court tC
require the production of books, papers, etc
relating to the sub iect of the inquiry, and ths
act empowers the court to issue orders requir
ing such production and to punish disobedi
ence
1t would seem as though congress intended
that the court should make the order sought
upon the mere request of the commission
without regard to the nature of the inquiry,
but it is difficult 10 believe that it could have
intended that the court should thus be thu
mere executor of the commissioners will; and
YET IL TIE COMMISSIONERS are IlOb Dpuul, NJ
above described, the conclusion we have
reached makes it unnecessary to consider
whether the questions were proper in them
selves The courts can not be instruments tc
aid the commission. The court therefore de
clines to make an order giving the commits
sion access to the books of the construction
companies, and compelling the officers Il
answer questions